Pages

About us

Members & staff of UKIP past & present. Committed to reforming the party by exposing the corruption and dishonesty that lies at its heart, in the hope of making it fit for purpose.
Only by removing Nigel Farage and his sycophants on the NEC can we save UKIP from electoral oblivion.
SEE: http://juniusonukip.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/a-statement-re-junius.html

Thursday, 30 September 2010

Nigel Farage: Working hard to defend British interests by getting drunk in pubs and clubs.

Tim Congdon says that he has no intention of becoming an MEP. Good for him. UKIP needs a leader who is based in Britain and can devote their time to reforming the party.

But what of our MEPs?

We already know that UKIP MEPs have a dreadful attendance record. They rarely appear at Committee.

Nigel Farage has bagged a position on the Committee that entails amongst the least work so far as Committees go: The fishing committee.

Meanwhile, no UKIP MEP sits on the all important Constitutional Committee, which overseas the transfer of power from the member states to the Commission. In effect, the only UK MEP who minds the UK's interest on this Committee is ironically Andrew Brons. Will Farage request a transfer? Will pigs fly?

Meanwhile, UKIP MEPs employ a large team of staff, most of whom do nothing but mind the party's internal affairs in the UK, which is strictly illegal. In fact, UKIP cannot afford staff, so it uses the taxpayer - courtesy of the Parliament - to finance staff who then use their time in a manner that is forbidden by the Parliament. Earlier this year, the Sunday Times referred directly to this practice when it revealed that Messrs Bannerman and Agnew used their employees' allowances to finance Reeve who worked on elections. And let us not forget those UKIP/EFD staff who worked illegally to promote Farage's humiliating bid for Buckingham. This is now of interest to OLAF. See: LINK

UKIP MEPs cannot be bothered to vote or carry out the research on the votes that occur at least one week a month, usually in Strasbourg. During those sessions, hundreds of votes can occur each day on both the underlying resolutions and proposals, plus the amendments thereto.

UKIP MEPs justify their stance to abstain instead of voting on the basis that the best place to determine British legislation is in the British Parliament. True, in an ideal world, but this also means that in the real world UKIP MEPs are not doing the work for which they were elected.

Given that over 75% of British laws come from the EU, a fact that UKIP never tires of telling us, why do UKIP MEPs abstain? It is because they cannot be bothered to carry out the research and work involved in casting their votes, where they might occasionally have a beneficial effect on the legislation. Sometimes this would make the difference between passing a worthwhile proposal or adopting an injurious resolution.

Take the following example:

On Wed 22nd Sept, UKIP MEPs voted on the "Placing on the Market and Use of Biocidal Products; Report: Christa Klaß (A7-0239/2010)".

Of some 360 amendments to that vast piece of legislation (many amendments of which were voted en masse), UKIP MEPs abstained on the following:

Committee Amendment 134 which reduced red tape for business and the time for evaluation of a biocidal product to be authorised from 12 months to 6.

Committee Amendment 156 - same.

Committee Amendments 181 - related to a safety measure.

Committee Amendment 184 - reduced red tape and improved safety.

Committee Amendment 192 - protected business investment and the protection of data.

The above example demonstrates that UKIP MEPs were too busy enjoying the good life in Strasbourg than to do what they were elected to do: legislate in the interests of their country. The upshot, per the examples above, was that opportunities to reduce red tape for business, alleviate animal cruelty and unnecessary testing on animals were all flagrantly disregarded in an instance of gross negligence to their electors.

This information has been provided by an insider who is fed up with the grossly negligent manner in which UKIP MEPs treat their affairs.

Tuesday's leadership debate at the Western Tiverton Hotel was very much as expected. Farage gave his usual soundbites, false promises, lies and rants. Bannerman was about as interesting as a limp rag and Winston McKenzie seemed to be there for the fun.

Tim Congdon gave a passable performance but he really needs to take off the gloves and expose Farage and Bannerman for what they really are – liars, cheats and crooks.

Gerard Batten was attacked for the alleged collapse of UKIP London. This was then used to attack the judgment of Congdon who has promised to make him Deputy Leader and Head of UKIP Policy Development.

But what of the Farage supporting Derek Clark? Under his 'inspired leadership’ the membership in the East Midlands has declined from 5600 members to just 820! And that was at the last count! The Farage sycophants don't seem bothered about that!

We also note that Farage has promised to to put even more disciplinary powers into the hands of the Cabal. He wants to make it easier to kick out those pesky UKIPPERS who may have the audacity to complain about his leadership. Farage gets more like Hitler with every passing day!

And don’t forget the biggest laugh of the night! Bannerman promised to make Baloney Maloney Deputy Leader. Snigger!

Here is what Dr Edmond had to say:

Things started badly for me as I drove early into the car park and there was Farage in a one sided conversation with the other three candidates, Tim, Bannerman and Winston. It took a while to get going but I enjoyed my time at the bar meeting other UKIPers. I was pleasantly surprised by how many came up to me, said hello and shook my hand, even Mr Bannerman but not of course Mr Farage or any of his 'team'.

According to the literature at the meetings the teams, most of whose members were not present, were with their promised jobs::

The meeting was chaired by Arnott, a Farage/Nuttall appointee The format is each candidate gives a 5 minute opening address followed by one minute to answer pre submitted quesions selected by young Farage man Arnott who seems to have put on a lot of weight since I saw him last 2 years ago. Positively Knapmanesque one might say. The meeting ended with each candidate given two minutes to sum up their position.

There was no unvetted questions from the floor and as a result Farage got away with some quite outrageous answers which were strangers to the truth as some members of the audience well knew.

The high spot was a Bannerman Farage spat over Farage admitting he had not bothered to read Bannerman's policy document/manifesto something which Pearson had obviously not done either and as a result was crucified on live TV.

Tim gave a passable but lack lustre performance. He needs to sharpen his act, speak with more passion, take on Farage's untruths head on and argue strongly for change..

Bannerman was better than I expected from working with him on the NEC. He did take on Farage head on over the policy issue.

Farage gave his usual loud monkey on a pole performance down to the cigarette paper metaphor. Has he ever given a speech without it? It went down well with the Faragistas in the audience who seem to have collectively poor short term memories. It was the same old Farage speech they must have heard many times before.

Winston was funny at times. I expect him to pull out in favour of Farage. He did sign Farage's nomination papers after all! I next expect to see Winston in the London Mayor contest.

Who won the debate? Farage but it was a rigged deck. That is the UKIP way.To see the original: LINK

The hustings moves to London on Saturday, October 2 with a further date in the South East on Sunday, October 3.

Wednesday, 29 September 2010

Bannerman’s website is probably the best designed of all the candidates. See: LINK

It is interesting to note that not a SINGLE MEP is backing him. The only name of note is Sir Patrick Moore and we very much doubt if the old boy would have done this if someone had made him aware of Bannerman’s dishonesty and lies.

We do note that Douglas ‘Himmler’ Denny has abandoned Farage to back his rival. No surprise to see Peter Reeve endorsing his boss. You will recall that Reeve was exposed by the Sunday Times after it emerged that he was being illegally paid by Bannerman and Agnew out of their EU allowances.

Baloney Maloney is also a supporter. Bannerman has announced that he will make him Deputy Leader. So Bannerman does have a sense of humour! You may recall that Bannerman once promised to make Del Young Deputy Leader. He later stood by and watched as the NEC and the odious Nuttall forced him out of the party.

We had to laugh when we read Bannerman’s biography. So he reckons that his mum was a Sophia Loren lookalike? Do us a favour!

We see that Bannerman has dropped ALL mention of being related to a former prime minister. A wise decision as we all knew that you were lying!

We noted the odd criticism of Farage:

"It means working as one team, not a one man band."

He claims that he is 'looking for the right lady to settle down with, when he’s not working all the time'.

Still living a lie, eh?

The website also features a photo of Bannerman standing next to former Bishop Nazir-Ali. A quick look at the list of supporters fails to show his name. We would hate to think that Bannerman is deliberately using the photo to mislead UKIPPERS into thinking that Nazir-Ali is backing him.

Let us not forget that the former bishop has some rather interesting views on homosexuality.

Nazir-Ali opposes the ordination of non-celibate gay and lesbian clergy and the blessing of same-sex unions. He has been "accused of pandering to hate and homophobia" after publishing a statement, on the day a Gay Pride parade took place in London, calling for homosexuals to "repent and be changed”.

So is Bannerman using the photo as part of his “I am not gay” routine?

And thanks for letting us know that you once lived with a certain Armando from the Dominican Republic.

And do please spare us the nonsense that you were a key player in the Northern Ireland ‘Peace Process’. None of the real key players can even remember you!

But we really love this line:

David believed enough in the cause of saving lives, and achieving a respectable peace in Northern Ireland, that he was prepared to undertake a job regardless of the evident dangers to himself.

But we were very disappointed to note that he failed to explain why he decided to leave the Tories and join UKIP. But we can well understand his reluctance to mention this.

Here are the facts:

Bannerman left the Tories because his future career prospects as a Conservative were zero. He was disliked by far too many senior Tories.

Bannerman only joined UKIP after he was promised a lead MEP position in a ‘safe’ region. It had nothing to do with conviction. He later told one of our colleagues that he was desperate to become an MEP because he “needed the money”.

Bannerman was also promised the chance to lead UKIP.

We also note that Bannerman has failed to mention one VERY important recent fact.

A Tory MP of our acquaintance told us that earlier this year Bannerman contacted senior Tory officials in Brussels and the Eastern Region with an offer to rejoin them IF he was allowed to be their lead MEP candidate in 2014.

So when was Bannerman going to tell the membership of UKIP about his plan to jump ship and return to the Tory fold?

Is that the thanks UKIPPERS get for helping you join the EU Gravy Train?

The Tories wisely turned you down. And who can blame them?

Your entire career in UKIP has been based on a lie. You are a political prostitute without a single shred of integrity. Your patriotism is dictated by how much money you can earn while keeping your snout firmly in the trough.

Why on earth would the Tories want that chump as one of their MEPs? And why would any UKIPPER want him as UKIP leader?

We should point out that more than one UKIPPER has told us that Bannerman is only standing to split the Congdon vote.

The usual spin, the usual lies, the usual promises. He made exactly the same pledges in his earlier 2006 leadership website and conspicuously failed to carry them out. So what has changed? See: LINK

We note that quite a few naive teenagers are backing him. The folly of youth! Someone should remind them that it was Nigel Farage who displayed complete indifference to the repeated attempts to set up the precursor of Young Independence. And look what he did to Del Young when the now former UKIPPER actually had the guts and vision to break the impasse and form YI. He soon got the push and was replaced by Lisa Duffy!

And isn’t it sad that Farage is desperate to present himself as Mr Youth? So how is your health, Mr Farage? Are the terrible back pains and sleepless nights taking their toll?

In the new website Farage promises to immediately abdicate from any form of management role. So what exactly is the point of electing him leader?

He promises big donors if elected. So will Farage block potential big donors if not elected?

And the shallowness of his thinking is most illuminating. He seems to think that leadership is just about appearing on the TV or in the newspapers. Will someone please remind him that he has been doing that for over 10 years and yet we are still no nearer to leaving the EU?

His website is shameless spin. Electoral failure is presented as success and public indifference to UKIP is presented as the exact opposite! And what about Farage's commitment to turn UKIP into a pan-European party? You won't find any mention of that!

Farage is a past master when it comes to lying and making false promises.

Don’t forget that in July 1999, Meridian TV’s Phil Hornby put a question to Nigel Farage, and received in response an unequivocal answer. An answer that has now come back to haunt him.

Hornby: "Is there something, Nigel Farage, a touch hypocritical about you flying out on these free flights and enjoying the restaurants and so on of the parliament here, and enjoyng the gravy train, so-called, life of an MEP? How do you square that circle?"

Farage: "You will remember that right through (the 1999 Euro campaign) that we said we are not going on the gravy train; that we are the only people who are intending, annually, to publish so that the public can inspect them, our expense accounts, our allowance accounts, and the excess that we get - the excess that we are forced to take - particularly on travelling allowances, we are going to be putting into a trust fund and that money will be used to help victims of the European Union in our country, so I do reject the allegation that we’re on the gravy train and there’s certainly no chance of the three of us going native."

He lied. Eleven years on and still no trust fund and no full audit of his accounts.

And don’t forget that a unanimous resolution passed at the NEC meeting of 17 November 1999 stated: "The NEC re-affirms its control over MEPs expenses and allowances, in accordance with the pledge signed prior to the Euro-election. Substantial allowances are being deposited within MEPs accounts which must come under NEC control for the benefit of the Party. Messrs Stone King, Solicitors, have been approached with a view to setting up the 'Trust Fund' promised to the electorate. The NEC wishes to take matters forward to counteract negative statements in the Press but is reluctant to incur legal expenditure without a guarantee of compliance by the MEPs".

Minutes of the meeting were circulated to branch chairmen and candidates on 24 November 1999 with a covering letter that included: "Enclosed is a copy of the agreement signed by all Euro election candidates prior to June 10th. This is a matter of a serious nature which must be resolved. The Party is not receiving the benefit in the way that was promised to Party members and to the public who voted for us".

The Trust fund was quietly forgotten.

Farage has said that he found it hard to lead UKIP and the EFD group. This is why he resigned. So what has changed?

He recommended Pearson as being “head and shoulders above the rest” of the candidates. Pearson’s short career as UKIP leader proved disastrous. After a few months he resigned. He admitted that he was “no good” at the job. What does that tell you about Farage’s judgment?

Farage has repeatedly said that he has spinal and other health problems. In a recent interview with the Kent News he said:

"Two or three of my vertebrae are damaged and will probably never be the same.”

"I've learned that you can't really be a leader and a manager at the same time, so I would being in a chief executive and a team of professionals to run things while I focused on the media and publicity side."

In other words:

'Vote me into office and I'll quit immediately and give the job to some mates'.

'Vote me in and trust me to appoint someone else to lead, because I can't'.

And don’t forget:

His failure to appoint competent media staff.

His failure to account for £211,000 that ‘vanished’ from the South East’s accounts

He lied to the media and the membership about firing Tom Wise.

His failure to account for 85% of the money raised through the Ashford call centre.

His involvement in the rigging of UKIP’s MEP selection process.

His failure to address outright fraud by Bannerman, Reeve and Agnew.

His failure to address money laundering by Agnew, himself and Pearson.

He endorsed the selection of Marta Andreasen as a UKIP MEP.

He promised not to employ family members. He later employed his wife.

His total failure to show ANY vision or leadership ability.

His total failure to implement a proper party structure or organisation.

His failure to account the €6,000 a year travel budget for each UKIP MEP.

His failure to conduct honest and transparent internal elections.

Do you really want this crook and liar as your future UKIP leader? A man who wants UKIP to become part of a pan-European party? A man who is happy to sit with fascists in the EFD?

Here is Farage's list of supporters. You will note that some of the most corrupt UKIPPERS are backing him.

Just a note to say that I won't be standing for the leadership: It is you who have built the UKIP brand, and it would not be fair to stand in your way. I'll help in any way I can.

All the best, Christopher

We said that he was mad!

Jason Smith withdrew from the race to support Bannerman. Another fool!

McKenzie's decision to stand has puzzled many UKIPPERS. He has no chance of winning and will be extremely lucky to get 200 votes. We hear that his decision to run had more to do with his ego.

Do you think that Winston would make a good leader? If so, watch this masterpiece....

And do listen for his urgent appeal to the cameraman. It can be heard 57 seconds into the film.

"Give me the cue for the next lot."

But at least the pigeon was VERY impressed!

Lisa Duffy in Court.

Lisa Duffy's picture. To be used by the NHS to highlight the terrible consequences of unprotected sex.

Mr Hardy has had his day in court. This concerned Gordon Parkin’s decision to unlawfully ban him from UKIP meetings. See: LINK

The trial was heard on Thursday and Friday of last week.

The party was represented by Lisa Duffy who, in common with Gordon Parkin, entered court with high expectations of success. We understand that she made a complete mess of it – no surprise there - and by the end of the proceedings was left feeling extremely foolish.

We understand that the Judge was less than impressed with UKIP and made some VERY pointed comments about the party.

We can only hope that the membership - the real payer - enjoys discharging the legal fees, which are estimated to run into thousands.

And just when you thought that Bloom couldn't bring UKIP and the Euro-sceptic movement into further disrepute.

When not urinating in hotel corridors Bloom likes to post his words of wisdom on Twitter

Here are just a few:

@DowningStreet is worried about #climate deniers. We should worry more about the stupid Cnuts inside it. What a Stupid Bunch of Cnuts...

Delegates at #copenhagen who think they can control the elements are a bunch of stupid self-serving Cnuts. What a Stupid Bunch of Cnuts... #eu

So now we know why government scientists talk [B- ollocks] on climate change#ukip

And don't forget these old extracts from his blog:

The dirty mac brigade visit Brussels for some fun.

What a Stupid Bunch of Cnuts...

One complete bunch of Cnuts – the editorial team at the Guardian newspaper – believes that it, along with 56 other publications throughout the world, can rightly issue instructions to the world through their editorial columns. The group of 56 newspapers today issued a statement simultaneously urging that there were just 'fourteen days to seal history's judgment on this generation'.

Complete Cnuts ex-Beatle, Paul McCartney, and IPCC Chair, Rajendra Pachauri were in Brussels last week, pushing lentils. They want to persuade the EU to persuade its citizens to stop eating meat because, according to them, eating meat causes climate change. This is the kind of nonsense that the Copenhagen conference (and the EU) is all about – bossing people about, telling them how they should live their lives and what to have for dinner. We had a barbecue in Brussels to let McCartney and Pachauri know what we thought of their silly plan.

Silly Cnut, the Prince of Wales has been invited to Copenhagen by the Danish government, according to the Times.

It’s easy for Cnut’s like Prince Charles to convince themselves that private jets are necessary for their job of saving the planet, and that poverty is just a trivial problem. He ought to be setting an example, and cycling to Copenhagen.

The sooner Bloom is kicked out of UKIP the better. The man is a disgrace to the whole Euro-sceptic movement.

And to think that UKIP could have had Richard North representing them in Yorkshire. He should have been UKIP’s lead candidate in 2004 but Farage rigged the selection so that his drinking buddy could join him in Brussels. Thanks Nigel!

Saturday, 25 September 2010

A Right 'Ard' Man! Don't mess with the Nuttall or you may just find yourself eating hospital food!

We hear that Farage has been quietly told that his involvement with the Hannan/Pearson referendum campaign is not required. How sad! However, the odious Paul Nuttall is more than welcome. See: LINK

Interesting article from our friends at New Europe.

The Brits, with their characteristic downbeat outlook have a saying, “you wait forever for a bus and then three arrive at the same time”. A situation that anyone who has been hanging around Place Luxembourg can relate to.

And so, it applies to referendum petitions. The British eurosceptics, peeved at being denied a referendum on Lisbon have been racing to organize campaigns, asking the Brits to sign petitions asking for a referendum on EU membership.

So far, three have turned up. It’s uncertain how many more are due.

First out the starting gate was Nikki Sinclaire MEP, who left the EFD Group because of what she saw as anti-semitism and homophobia amongst its members.. Her campaign ( LINK), which she dubs ‘the people’s petition’ is trying to raise 100,000 signatures. She argues that the UK is neither in, nor outside the EU and a referendum on membership will provide a firm position for the country’s future relationship with Europe, either inside or outside the union.

She is touring the UK garnering signatures. She claims to have had 10,000 in the first week of campaigning.

UKIP responded to this by launching a referendum petition of their own (LINK) their third in recent years. One that closed in 2008 had 10,782, another one, launched in November 2009, seems to have disappeared. It remains to be seen how the latest will do, but there doesn’t seem to be much promotion behind it and it is said that some UKIP people are a little embarrassed about launching a second petition.

Junius says: The earlier UKIP referendum 'campaign' was simply a front to trouser more EU money for Farage.

Enter Dan Hannan.

He has launched a third petition. This is the slickest of them all, and possibly crucially, has support from the left and right. The move,(LINK), which announces itself as a “ballsy, cutting edge campaign” is getting the most press and is a much more professional effort, even though it was the last one off the ground.

They say that, “It’s a sad fact that Britain is sleepwalking into the European Super-State and Britain must wake up to the nightmares hiding under the sheets of Brussels. EU laws and directives made without our knowledge or consent, behind locked doors of the most complicated clauses and sub-clauses imaginable.”

Sadly, there is no joint campaign against cliches and tired metaphors.

One interesting aspect to the last of the petitions is its address, 95 Wilton Rd, Westminster.

This must be a one-stop shop for eurosceptics. It is also the home to Just Skips, which could help cart off all those EU Directives. It is also houses Career Amazon, a recruiting agency that could be useful for those seeking work beyond Barroso’s empire.

After a hard day’s eurosceptiking, why not pay a visit to Elite London Escorts or Discrete Angels, who also share the address. They can arrange a relaxing session, short or long with a “busty escort”. If you’re feeling a bit strapped for cash, call in at Crv Solutions Loans to tide you over, or help pay the escort!

It is also the base for Pornoteufel, a community of “swingers and voyeurs”. I’d tell you more but there’s no way that I’m going to their website.
Or you could entertain your escort, by introducing her to some of the amazing and unusual machines offered by the Cabaret Mechanical Theatre.

Perhaps the most chilled experience comes courtesy of Kind Seed LTD, who use the address to mail out “Authentic Marijuana Seeds”.

Steve Allison is in charge of Tim Congdon's leadership campaign. This has set a few alarm bells ringing as Mr Allison is now in favour of pan-European parties and funding. Mr Congdon is not in favour of this. You may recall that Mr Congdon spoke out against the EFD at the UKIP conference. See: LINK

So why is Mr Allison willing to campaign for a man who it totally against the idea of UKIP becoming a pan-European party? Allison is a man not to be trusted.

Readers may also recall that Steve Allison tried to leak false information about Mike Nattrass to this blog. Allison claimed that Nattrass was going to join the BNP. A quick check proved this to be a lie. See: LINK

Here are Mr Allison's views on pan-European parties. We also include Wolfman McGough's comments. He is also in favour of UKIP becoming pan-European. They are taken from the UKIP members only forum:

The Euro-sceptic Parties, like UKIP, tend to shy away from forming organisations that are seen as taking them deeper into the system. As illustrated by the almost frenzied rush by some sections of UKIP to ensure our party is not contaminated by receipt of such money! This means Euro-sceptic groups don't access the funding that is available and leave the field clear for the pro-EU organisations to grab all the cash.

UKIP Members seem to fixate on the requirement that to draw down such funds the party must “observe the founding principles of the European Union”.

However, those ‘founding principles’ are the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law.

Which of those principles does UKIP Object to? Obviously we have a different interpretation of them from other parties and nations, and we understand and practise them in a very different way from Continental Europeans. But we, as a party do support these principles. There is no requirement for example to support any other aims of the EU, there is no requirement to support political union or greater integration. The irony is that UKIP could take EU Money and use it to fight political union and further integration in the name of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law.

So it's not that such funding isn't available to Euro sceptic groups. It is just that such groups chose to not access the funding due to some mistaken idea of ideological purity.

The phrase "Cutting off one's own nose to spite one's face" comes to mind here.

Paid by whom and with what?

One of the carrots of accepting membership of a pan-European political party would be funding for a "think tank" to develop policy. This would probably be based in the UK with a big slice of 1,300,000 Euro Budget. This money could be used to research positions, produce policies, print and distribute booklets, etc. It could also be used to fund conferences and meetings. Yes I know its a buy off (or a sell out?) but its a lot of money that UKIP could use to fight the EU with.

I rather like the irony of using the EU's money to fight against it. At least we'd be getting some of our own money back.

If you think about it UKIP does only exist because of the EU! At the risk of breaking NEC Confidentiality I will say there was extensive discussion about this at the NEC and a lot more information is still outstanding. I went into the meeting pre-disposed to fight the "Pan European Party" to my last breath, but I listened to the presentation, I asked questions and received answers and I agreed at NEC that the party should investigate the outstanding issues and the NEC receive another report.

The proposal was then to present this report at a special meeting open to all UKIP Members in London on October 9th. The morning session could have been an official Leadership Hustings and an afternoon session on the pan European party proposal. This would have allowed three or even four hours of informed discussion rather than just the very brief debate and prepared speeches to the motion at conference.

Unfortunately I understand the amendment to the motion was defeated and so the Special General Meeting will now not take place. I think this is a real shame as it would have allowed informed decision making and not knee jerk responses

I have not agreed to the proposal but what I have said is that it doesn’t need to be rejected out of hand without some really serious consideration. There is some serious money on the table and UKIP needs every penny it can get. The key question I asked, and received assurances to, was that being in such a party would in no way mean the end of UKIP, we would still be UKIP and would continue to campaign and stand in elections as UKIP.

The whole thing is by no means a done deal but there are some very attractive carrots on offer and I for one find the irony very attractive in taking EU Money to spend fighting the EU.

Junius says: And what about UKIP's core principles? UKIP was supposed to be against the pan-European ideal. And so yet another UKIPPER sells himself to Farage 'For A Few Euros More'. We know full well what Allison is after - Steve Allison UKIP East Midlands MEP. Or so he hopes!

Full Name: MICHAEL JACK MCGOUGHPosts: 202

Re: NEC and policyReply 16 on: September 06, 2010, 06:53:04 PM

I endorse what Steve has said;

Perhaps we should put this to the membership;

"Should we set up a UK based think tank to fight the EU ,using money that would otherwise be available to our enemies in other parties to promote the EU "

together with;

"Should we leave the pan european EFD Group thus depriving us of funds to educate the public about the EU such as we have previously done with the two excellent videos"

And more from Allison:

A plan is a vital tool but it can't be so inflexible that it ignores targets of opportunity. The qualifying date for accessing this funding is November so the conference decision effectively shuts the door on up to 1,300,000 Euros of funding next year and makes the pot to be shared out amongst the other parties that much bigger, so not only have UKIP thrown away a huge amount of cash they have effectively donated that cash to our opponents who are happy to use it.

And this from ukipdowntown:

September 06, 2010, 07:23:55 PMSteve- I thought you guys had a business plan? Is that it, Get more money from the EU?

End of quotes. So there you have it. McGough and Allison are in favour of UKIP becoming pan-European just to get more money. So much for fighting for British independence. No doubt most of the money will vanish into a certain MEP's bank account!

And here is Batten's open letter: LINK We hear that the other Tim has been crying all night!

Here is Mr Congdon's statement:

Statement on the 2010 UK Independence Party leadership election from Gerard Batten MEP and Tim Congdon

Tim Congdon and Gerard Batten have decided to combine forces in a bid for the leadership of the UK Independence Party, in the forthcoming leadership election. As explained in an open letter to his supporters, Gerard Batten – the MEP for London – has decided not to seek the leadership himself, but to support the candidature of Tim Congdon. If Tim Congdon is elected as Leader of the UK Independence Party, Tim will appoint Gerard as his Deputy Leader and Head of Policy Development.

Gerard Batten’s reasons for this move are given in the accompanying open letter. Gerard came second in the 2009 Leadership Election with 26% of the vote, and is one of the most popular and respected figures in the UK Independence Party. He was one of the party’s founder members in September 1993 and is currently Party Spokesman on Justice and Home Affairs, Immigration and Islamism.

Tim Congdon is one of the UK’s leading economic commentators and served, as an economic “wise man”, on the Treasury Panel of Independent Forecasters – the forerunner of the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee – between 1993 and 1997. He was appointed CBE in 1997 for services to economic debate. Tim has for almost 20 years been noted for his Eurosceptic views and, in particular, for his opposition to the introduction of the single European currency in the UK in the 1990s.

In his welcome for Gerard’s decision, Tim said,

I am absolutely thrilled that Gerard has decided to combine forces with me in my bid to become leader of UKIP. We are both horrified by the surrender of the British people’s freedoms to European Union bureaucrats in a foreign capital and the immense damage now being inflicted on the UK’s economy by its EU membership. We will work together in the challenging political task of taking the UK out of the EU.

I could not have found a better partner in my leadership bid. I look forward to working with Gerard in the next four years, in the run-up to the 2014 European elections, and perhaps also in the next general election. We both believe that the Leader of UKIP must concentrate his efforts on campaigning in the UK, and not be distracted by what is happening in the European Parliament in Brussels and Strasbourg. I see this very much as a joint leadership bid. We will work together closely as a team.

Thursday, 23 September 2010

West Midlands MEPs Nikki Sinclaire and Mike Nattrass have accepted Robin Tilbrook's offer to be guest speakers at the English Democrats 2010 Conference in Nottingham.

They will promoting the campaign for a referendum on Britain's continued membership of the EU. See: LINK

The English Democrats 8th Annual General Meeting is to be held on Friday 24th, Saturday 25th and Sunday 26th with the main agenda items on the 25th. The conference is at the Belfrey Hotel, Mellor's Way, Off Woodhouse Way, Nottingham, NG8 6PY.

Wednesday, 22 September 2010

We have been informed that Mad Monckton has been thinking of pulling out of the leadership race. He was supposed to have made his final decision today. We do wish that he would make his mind up!

Gerard Batten and Tim Congdon have both requested the membership database after learning that Farage and his supporters were using it to contact members. Members were 'advised' that Nigel was the 'best and most experienced candidate' during these calls. It came as no surprise to hear that both Congdon and Batten have been denied the database.

Farage's supporters claim that the ex-leader has only been using the South East database. Lies! We have had it confirmed that UKIPPERS from other regions also received calls from Farage or his sycophants. During these calls UKIPPERS were asked to support Farage.

Gerard Batten has been asked to stand down by Roger Knapman and endorse Tim Congdon's campaign. Batten has declined as he feels that this may be his last chance to become UKIP leader.

It is expected that the Earl of Dartmouth will endorse Farage. He had originally promised to support Congdon.

Soner Çağaptay of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy is a right-of-centre writer on the subject of Turkish accession to the EU. He is described by critics as having an "apparent distance from scholarly objectivity". Actually, his work would probably reflect the opinions of most Conservative/UKIP members (take what you will from that remark), and his critics might also be as easily accused of bias as he himself is.

He becomes interesting to us, because we note that he will addressing a meeting of the "Turkish Assessment Group", a front group for the neo-Nazi infiltrated EFD group in the European Parliament on September 29th.

This is the group organised by convicted racist Morten Messerschmidt, which boasts among its supporters the BNP leader Nick Griffin. Griffin was famously photographed at a meeting organised by Messerschmidt, and to the embarrassment of UKIP (which tries to hide its far right connections) the photo appeared on the EFD group website.

The BNP's Nick Griffin. Photo as featured on the EFD website.

We wonder if Soner Çağaptay knows exactly who he will be addressing. We suspect he soon will.

Tuesday, 21 September 2010

A personal statement from Tim Congdon on his candidacy for the leadership of the UK Independence Party

Why I support UKIP

Britain is a special nation. For the last 300 years it has been admired across the world as the home of parliamentary democracy and the champion of the rule of law. In two world wars it defended a political system which – above all – prized the freedom of the individual. Our political and legal traditions are best seen as attempts to stop the abuse of power by the state.

In 1973 the UK joined (what was then) the European ‘Common Market’, essentially for economic reasons. We wanted to be able to trade freely with our European neighbours and to match the higher economic growth they had enjoyed in the previous 15 years. Since then our political independence has been progressively whittled away.

New legislative enactments affecting our country are now mostly labelled ‘directives’ and ‘regulations’, not laws. They are passed by the Council of Ministers, not our own Parliament. The processes involved are complicated, obscure and secret, and the key movers are foreign bureaucrats and lobbyists, not our own politicians and parliamentarians. In a host of important areas of national life, known as ‘competences’, powers have passed from Westminster and Whitehall to Brussels and Strasbourg. The right to propose new directives and regulations lies not with our own government, certainly not with our Parliament in Westminster, but with the European Commission.

I support the UK Independence Party because the only way that we can restore our ability to make our own laws and to govern ourselves is for the UK to leave the European Union.

The erosion of democracy

The government of Britain is now shared – in an extraordinarily confused way – by a group of democratically-elected politicians in London and an entrenched bureaucracy in a foreign capital. The bureaucrats are appointed for the long term. They can and will erode the power of politicians who are in office only for a few years and can be removed by the electorate.

Not surprisingly, government by foreign bureaucrats is bad government. Whatever aspect of the interaction between the European Union and the UK we look at, we see inefficiency and failure. Think of the cost and distortions of the Common Agricultural Policy, the shambles of the Common Fisheries Policy, the burden of unnecessary business regulation, the effect of the open EU borders which have let in over a million workers from other EU countries and put pressure on our social services, the assault on habeas corpus and personal freedom represented by the new European Arrest Warrants, the encroachment on our own criminal justice system by a new European Public Prosecutor, the hit to the competitiveness of our chemical and heavy energy using industries from EU environmental directives, the damage to the City of London from misjudged intervention by new pan-European financial regulators and......., well, the list could be extended over a few pages. All these arrangements are making us poorer or less free. Nevertheless, we have to pay the European Union for the privilege of letting it misgovern us. By 2013 Britain will be handing over to the EU a net figure of about £10 billion a year. That will help foreign bureaucrats boss us around in the style to which they are accustomed.

The opportunity for UKIP

The EU is now unpopular in the UK. This is revealed – bizarrely – by opinion research from the European Commission itself. According to the Eurobarometer poll which it finances, in August 2010 29% of people in the UK consider EU membership ‘a good thing’, whereas 33% see it as ‘a bad thing’. Net support for EU membership had been falling for many years. The cost of membership is rising, while people will increasingly resent the attack on our institutions and way of life that the EU bureaucracy represents. Net support for the EU has now become net opposition and that net opposition will increase.

Logically, political parties advocate policies that the electorate wants. The British people have had enough of the EU. However, all three of the so-called ‘main parties’ favour continued UK membership of the EU on the present terms. In the 1997 general election Jimmy Goldsmith bravely started a new party, the Referendum Party. Its purpose was simple. By threatening to take votes away from the big parties, it would extract from them a commitment that any large future change in the UK’s relationship with the EU would be put to a referendum.

All three parties agreed that such a referendum must be held. It was reiterated in their 2005 general election manifestoes. But – when the Lisbon Treaty, undoubtedly a major constitutional upheaval, came before Parliament in 2008 – two parties, Labour and the Liberal Democrats, forgot their promise. In late 2009 the Lisbon Treaty was about to become law across the EU. The Conservatives under David Cameron then said that – if they came to power in the next general election – they also would not hold a referendum on the new treaty. They knew full well that it was a radically new and different constitutional set-up between the EU and its members. But they would do nothing about it.

The three main parties have broken a promise and betrayed the British people. The sad truth is that Britain’s ‘political class’ is corrupt and inadequate. Moreover, it is increasingly integrated with the larger European political class of which the European Commission’s bureaucracy is part. In effect, the Conservatives, Labour and the Liberal Democrats have surrendered control of our country to foreign dignitaries and officials who operate from a capital city outside our borders.

Disappointment with the EU has turned into disillusionment and disillusionment is now becoming anger. The UK Independence Party is the only significant political force that can channel this anger into votes and so take Britain out of the EU. At the next European elections, in 2014, the Conservative-Lib Dem coalition is likely to be very unpopular, because of the difficult economic situation. UKIP will have its best-ever opportunity to take more votes, in a major expression of British public opinion, than any of the three other parties.

We have a great opportunity – but we also face a challenge. The challenge to the party is to maximise its brand and image, to spread its vital message about the future of our country, and to obtain the most favourable possible media coverage. In a nutshell, we must maximise our message – our favourable and positive message – in the media. That is the way to secure the highest possible number of votes in a media-savvy democracy in the era of electronic communications. That is what UKIP must do.

What will I bring to UKIP?

In standing for the leadership of UKIP, I believe that I am the best person to meet the challenge now facing UKIP.

I believe that, over the next four years, UKIP must have the following new organizational priorities,

- To improve its image in the national and local media by presenting its case in high-quality research documents, newspaper articles, webcasts and so on,- To set up an effective campaign and publicity machine in London, which – whether we like it or not – is where the UK media are centred,- To work hard with the existing Eurosceptic and Eurorealist think-tanks both to strengthen the argument for withdrawal and to spread that message through the media and more widely,- To support the organization of regular social events across the country, in order to reinforce a sense of identity with UKIP, and- To establish a significant flow of donations by fund-raising, which will be helped by the social events and research publications I have been talking about.

Let me emphasize I want to build on the magnificent work already being done – mostly on a voluntary basis – at the branch and regional levels. I will listen to party members for new ideas about promoting the party and furthering the cause.

I do not want to be a MEP. Repeat: I do not want to be a MEP. The work I am describing must be done in the UK. I have said – and I will reiterate – that the centre of gravity of the United Kingdom Independence Party must be in the United Kingdom. Our MEP representation is a great strength to the party, and there is no conflict between working harder in both the European Parliament and the UK. We must move forward on a united front.

I have set up a research business (Lombard Street Research Ltd.) from an initial capital of £100 and built it into one of the most respected economic research companies in this country. (It now has a turnover of over £4 million and employs people in three countries.) The skills I used in establishing a successful research business will be the same skills I will be using to strengthen UKIP if I become leader.

Finally, I am one of the UK’s most influential economists. I served on the UK’s Treasury Panel from 1993 to 1997 as a so-called ‘wise person’ and was appointed Commander of the British Empire in 1997 ‘for services to economic debate’. If I am elected leader, UKIP will have the best economist in British politics.

Who am I?

Many party members will have seen me on television or heard me on radio, usually discussing a topical economic or financial theme. Yes, I am an economist, and my bread-and-butter for over 35 years has come from commenting on the British economy and its many problems. I don’t at present have ‘a full-time job’. I retired from Lombard Street Research in 2005, in order to have more time to write books and essays. (I love writing and seeing my name in print.) I set up a new consultancy – International Monetary Research Ltd. – in 2009, really to have a platform for my ideas, and you can have a look at its website (http://www.imr-ltd.com/.) If I don’t become leader, I will probably spent most of my time building up International Monetary Research Ltd. into a meaningful research business.

I was born in 1951 and am now 59 years old. I grew up in England, but with two spells as a child in foreign parts (Iran, for 10 months in 1956, and South Africa, for 18 months in 1959 and 1960). It has become clear to me, as I look back, that those two spells made me feel very ‘British’ and different. That has stayed with me for the rest of my life. (I can remember the Afrikaner children at my junior school sneering at me because I was from England; I can also remember the delirious crowds at Durban Docks when HMS Belfast called in for a short visit; other memories are standing in a three-deep crowd as Harold Macmillan passed by in a motorcade [the ‘wind of change’ speech] and knocking on the doors of palatial homes in Durban North for ‘bob a job’ assignments. [A ‘bob’ – you will recall – was one shilling. At that time South Africa had pounds, shillings and pence.] For most of our time in South Africa my family lived in a council flat.)

Back in England, I got the 11-plus and went to Colchester Royal Grammar School from 1962 to 1969. I was awarded an Open Scholarship by St. John’s College, Oxford, in 1969 and took a 1st Class degree (in Modern History and Economics) in 1972. The marks in my economics papers were equal top in my year.

My first job was on the economics staff of The Times from 1973 to 1976, a period of almost unrelenting (and for me most fascinating and enjoyable) economic crisis. That was where my interest in money and banking, and in monetary control to defeat inflation (‘monetarism’), began. In 1976 I went into the City as the economic adviser to a stockbroking firm, L. Messel & Co. I became a partner in 1980 and was fortunate in 1984 to be able to sell my stake in the firm to (what became) Lehman Brothers. I was briefly Lehman’s chief London economist, but in 1989 left to set up my own research and consultancy business, Lombard Street Research Ltd.

My work in economics has not been purely day-to-day commentary. I have also written important and influential academic papers, collected in two books Reflections on Monetarism (1990) and Keynes, the Keynesians and Monetarism (2007). I was appointed Honorary Professor at Cardiff Business School in 1990 and for every year until 2006 I gave a course of lectures on monetary economics. I was also a visiting professor of economics at City University Business School from 1998 to 2004. So I sometimes call myself ‘Professor Tim Congdon’, although I no longer have an academic affiliation. I am at present finishing off an American version of Keynes, the Keynesians and Monetarism, which I hope will appear next year as Money in a Free Society.

I have been a successful businessman and investor. I am a so-called ‘Name’ (i.e., capital provider) at Lloyd’s of London and own two forest estates in Scotland. When I take a break from my consultancy and writing, I enjoy walking on those estates and thinking about how to improve them. I also enjoy foreign holidays, both in the EU and outside it.

I have been married to Dorianne for 22 years. We have a daughter, Venetia, who is 19 and is about to start a post-graduate degree at Linacre College, Oxford.

My work in UKIP

Until 2006 I had always supported the Conservative Party, although I could not vote for Ted Heath in either of the two general elections in 1974. I voted against ‘the Common Market’ in the 1975 referendum.

I joined UKIP in January 2007, at the prompting of the then leader, Roger Knapman, whom I had known for almost 20 years. Almost immediately, I wrote an article in The Daily Telegraph on why I couldn’t support Cameron. This coincided with the so-called ‘defection’ from the Conservatives to UKIP of Lord Pearson and Lord Willoughby. In late January 2007 the Conservative Party’s private polling put the UKIP share in the national vote at 6% - 7%. (Eight weeks of unremitting anti-UKIP ‘knocking copy’ then followed in the national press. I am not saying here where these stories came from, but I have my views.)

It is well-known that I don’t want to become a MEP; it is not a secret that I believe our main fight must be in the UK, not in Brussels or Strasbourg. The financial crisis in late 2008 came as a profound shock to me. I was also disappointed that UKIP was not, in my view, devoting enough effort to the UK public debate, particularly in view of the imminent ratification of the new EU constitution. I therefore left UKIP in order to have more access to the top brass in the Conservative Party (and to some extent UK officialdom more generally) to argue for ‘quantitative easing’, among other things. QE was in fact adopted in early March 2009 – and, I am happy to say, the economy recovered briskly.

When he became leader, Lord Pearson was keen to persuade me to rejoin UKIP. I had hoped and expected that the Conservatives would keep to their promise of holding a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. I wrote to Lord Pearson to say that – if David Cameron reneged on that promise – I would rejoin UKIP. I copied the letter to about a dozen senior figures in British politics, including Cameron. A few weeks later Cameron said that the Conservatives would not hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. I rejoined UKIP.

In all this to-ing and fro-ing (for which I must apologise), I was consistent in believing

i. that the UK must withdraw from the EU, andii. that the key to getting us out of the EU must be a UK-based and UK-focussed campaign to improve UKIP’s research message and media coverage.

I was doing what I could as a private citizen concerned about our country’s future. Bluntly, I felt that in 2008 UKIP was not doing enough. But it is now our only hope – and so I was glad to rejoin.

I was UKIP’s parliamentary candidate in the Forest of Dean constituency (where I live) in the 2010 general election. I hugely enjoyed the election campaign, in which – with my excellent band of supporters – I more than doubled the UKIP vote and kept my deposit.

Monday, 20 September 2010

We have already mentioned that Alan Hardy has taken Gordon Parkin - pictured above - to court over his unlawful banning from UKIP meetings. See: LINK

It is interesting to note that UKIP is funding Parkin's defence. What does the membership think about this? After all, they were never asked if they minded. Should their contributions be used to fund a costly court case? And did UKIP inform the court that they were going to fund Parkin's defence. The law states that the court must be informed if a third party is funding a case. We hear that both Parkin and UKIP failed to inform the court of this simple fact. Naughty!

Leadership Hustings

The hustings dates for the UKIP leadership contest were recently announced by Party General Secretary 'Frightened Rabbit' Arnott.

There will be seven hustings held across the country, as detailed below:

You will note that UKIP's leadership is obviously not bothered about the candidates meeting Scottish and Welsh members. And Nigel is still phoning members for support. He has also contacted every regional organiser to ask for support.

Nigel in the papers

Giving Farage another term as Leader would be a disaster for UKIP. But all is not lost, for maybe, just maybe 'our Nigel' really wants to be the Press Officer?

Consider this statement to his local newspaper:

'I've learned that you can't really be a leader and a manager at the same time so I would bring in a chief executive and a team of professionals to run things while I focussed on the media and publicity side'.

Sunday, 19 September 2010

Many UKIPPERS were amused to hear that Scruffy Duffy had been made Returning Officer for UKIP's leadership election.

Announcing her appointment, the odious Paul Nuttall said: "The NEC is confident that we have found the right person for the job. "

You certainly have. David Bannerman will be pleased!

Let us hope that she brings to the job all those wonderful qualities that she previously brought to Young Independence - incompetence, dishonesty, arrogance, apathy and stupidity.

It is interesting to note that Ms Duffy and her partner - Peter Reeve - have a habit of taking her very young children to UKIP meetings in the East. On more than occasion members have been shocked to see the 'loving parents' leave their children to fall asleep on the floor as the meeting dragged on late into the night. The children had to go to school the next day. What a 'caring' mother!

Lisa Duffy shares something in common with the late Quentin Crisp. She also believes that dirt doesn't get any worse after the first four years. That explain a lot. We used to hear that Del Young - former NEC member - had to wear a nose peg when forced to sit next to her.

Saturday, 18 September 2010

We all know the majority of UKIP members are non racist open minded members of society, as I would like to think I am!

However I encountered a wing of the party the other day which is far from open minded.

It all stemmed from when I and 2 others dared to disagree with party policy on the smoking ban. I am a supporter of the ban however as you probably know UKIP is against the ban, this isn’t the point however, at first all was going fine abit of friendly debate and so on. Then Mr UKIP arrives, accusing me of being a traitor! Why? I dared to disagree with the party's talisman Nigel Farage’s stance on something, a letter has now been sent to my branch manager requesting my expulsion from the party, need I say more about this Mr UKIP if he has time to waste writing letters about me.

I just thought I’d tell you that story because it backs up my point that, there is an extremest wing in UKIP that belongs in the BNP. Its a dangerous thing that these people claim to be UKIP supporters and go around mis-quoting party policy giving the rest of us a bad name. Therefore I see it as essential that the next party leader purges the party ranks of these people before it gets too big of a problem to solve quietly.

The type of extremism varies in UKIP from racists to authoritarians etc. It worries me that these people can shout that they are UKIP members from the rooftops and give party policy over in a false way, it is damaging for the party and if nothing is done it is the sort of problem that can destroy the party from the inside.If UKIP really does have ambitions of joining the ‘big 3′ and turning it into the ‘big 4′ which they do, extremism has to disappear from the party and not return.

Inspired by the success of the American campaign activists at the coming Tory conference will hold a rally ostensibly to air criticism of Coalition policies but the hidden agenda will be to set up a Tea Party umbrella organisations to bring together the various right wing smaller government lower tax pressure groups like the Tax Payers Alliance and the Freedom Association.

This spells big trouble for UKIP as Daniel Hanaan, Tory MEP is expected to play a big part in making the tea and clearly smaller government fits rather nicely with leaving the EU. Farage's UKIP, is looking rather stale and a party incapable of delivering. Right wingers are frustrated and they are looking for something new and fresh. They will of course recruit largely from the ranks of disillusioned Tories many of whom are currently in UKIP. I expect it will recruit and run via Facebook and similar Internet Services at low cost and high penetration.

Worse for UKIP is that David Davies whom Dave defeated in the Tory leadership election, is on the fringes of this movement and may even speak at the fringe tea party. And there are a number of other Tory MPs on the fringes.

Cameron is worried and is scuppering plans for more 'Open Primaries' where genuinely local and independent PPCs may be selected like the GP lady in the South West. The Tories will retain control of the candidate list but for how long.

In these circumstances UKIP needs a re-brand fast and that's not going to happen if Farage is returned as leader. Even with a new leader the tide may already have turned against UKIP. Farage and his Cabal have squandered UKIP's chances and I cannot see the British people giving them a third chance now an attractive and far more effective alternative is available.

It will of course leave the EU protest vote under Tory control just like under Pearson. Plus ca change.. as the French say.

Weeping Martaloses court appeal. Will Nigel offer her a shoulder to cry on?

How tragic. Marta has lost the appeal against her sacking. We really weep for her!

From European Voice:

Andreasen loses legal appeal, but vows to keep on fighting

A European court throws out MEP Marta Andreasen's claim of unfair dismissal from the Commission

Marta Andreasen, who was sacked as chief accountant of the European Commission and is now a member of the European Parliament, has lost an appeal against her dismissal. The EU's General Court last week upheld a decision of the European Civil Service Tribunal and ordered Andreasen to pay her own legal costs and those of the Commission.

Undaunted, Andreasen said this week that she was looking at the possibility of a further appeal to the European Court of Justice and would file a case at the European Court of Human Rights.

"In my appeal I focused on a breach of human rights which they [the judges] just disregarded".

The General Court threw out Andreasen's arguments that her dismissal was disproportionate and violated EU rules, as well as her rights to a fair trial and good administration under the EU's Charter of Fundamental Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights.

In 2002, Andreasen, who had fallen out with the then director-general for budget, went public with complaints about the Commission's accounting system. She told MEPs and the European Court of Auditors that the Commission's book-keeping left the EU's annual budget vulnerable to fraud.

Court ruling

The Argentine-Spaniard was initially moved from her position as chief accountant, then suspended on full pay. She was sacked in 2004 after a disciplinary board found she had breached staff regulations by making unauthorised public statements about her work, and by failing to follow orders from her managers. The civil service tribunal later upheld the dismissal in a ruling of November 2007.

“The whole procedure is ludicrous,” Andreasen said. “In my appeal I already focused on a breach of human rights which they [the judges] just disregarded.”

“I thought I had put the case correctly, and they just dismissed it,” she said. She added that she was annoyed that the appeal had taken almost three years from the initial ruling.

In 2009, Andreasen was elected to the European Parliament as a British MEP for the UK Independence Party. She was treasurer of UKIP in 2007-09, but resigned in protest at how the party was being managed.

Andreasen is a liar, a fraud and has no interest in British independence from the EU.

Her often repeated claim to have been dismissed from the Commission because she insisted on proper accounting is nonsense.

She was actually dismissed for failing he to produce a report - despite reminders - on how best to combat fraud in the EU.

She was suspended from the OECD after allegations of racism were made against her.

She does not live in the UK.

She does not pay UK taxes.

She is a supporter of the EU. She considers herself an ‘EU reformist’.

She has absolutely no loyalty to Britain or her constituents in the South East. Her knowledge of the region is almost nil. For instance, she didn’t even know that Canterbury was in Kent!

UKIP has an ethnic Danish MEP, who was born in Argentina, currently holds Spanish citizenship and lives in Barcelona. She also employs a Dutch researcher in Brussels. So much for Farage's claim that UKIP supports British jobs for British workers!

One can only wonder why Farage was unable to find a suitable British born candidate with at least some working knowledge of the area they wished to represent?

She only expressed an interest in UKIP after three other parties - the Tories included - rejected her attempts to become one of their MEP candidates.

It should be remembered that Nigel Farage contemptuously ignored UKIP’s own selection rules so that Andreasen could become a UKIP candidate.

Lynnda Robson - Gerard Batten’s political assistant - made a formal complaint about this to both Christopher Gill and UKIP’s NEC.

In this complaint it was pointed out that Andreasen was ineligible to stand as a UKIP MEP candidate for the following reasons:

She was not a UK resident.She was not a fully paid-up member of UKIP.She could not get a CRB check.Her proposer also proposed someone else.She was not on the UK electoral Register and had no intention of mentioning that she was standing in two different regions.

Ms Robson’s complaint was rejected. She later took UKIP to court over this issue. UKIP’s leadership agreed to settle with her out of court.

Andreasen has used the members of UKIP. She was never interested in getting Britain out of the EU.

Her only motivation is personal gain. Remember when she resigned as UKIP Treasurer after she was told by the odious Nuttall that she would no longer be paid for doing the job? See: LINK

All those who pointed out that Andreasen was a political prostitute have been proved right.

And who pushed for her to become an MEP? Nigel Farage.

And who supplied her with a UK address so she could stand as a UKIP candidate? Lord Pearson.

I will make OLAF investigations truly independent and efficient. If the EU wants to send a signal to the taxpayers of Europe that they want to stop abuse and financial irregularities then what better way to show this by hiring me for the job?

Today I challenge them to hire a straight shooter, and await their response.

But at least Andreasen has no chance of becoming head of OLAF. Her atrocious employment record would be enough to discourage any employer with an ounce of sense from taking her on.